Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Board and Card Games > Ogre and G.E.V.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-16-2014, 03:26 PM   #11
selenite
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talorien View Post
Thanks, Henry, I've updated the wording on this to remove the ambiguity.
New wording is "Add “Infantry mounted on vehicles are always a single group.” to the end of the section." If I have three SHVYs or two GEV-PCs carrying infantry in a hex that creates a 6/1 infantry unit.

Suggested wording: "Add “Infantry mounted on vehicles are always a single group (if more than three squads are mounted, they are organized as a 3/1 group and a second with the remaining infantry).” to the end of the section."
selenite is offline  
Old 06-16-2014, 05:08 PM   #12
BlackHat
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Quote:
Originally Posted by selenite View Post
New wording is "Add “Infantry mounted on vehicles are always a single group.” to the end of the section." If I have three SHVYs or two GEV-PCs carrying infantry in a hex that creates a 6/1 infantry unit.

Suggested wording: "Add “Infantry mounted on vehicles are always a single group (if more than three squads are mounted, they are organized as a 3/1 group and a second with the remaining infantry).” to the end of the section."
Hmm I got the opposite impression of what they were saying...

Right now we have the ambiguity to suggest what your saying.... (Infantry mounted on vehicles in the same square stack)

I thought they were trying to say they don't stack. Thus 3 1/1 infantry riding 3 LT tanks in the same square do NOT become 3/1 infantry for ATT or DEF. (Unless they dismount then they can become 3/1)
__________________
I wear a Hat.
(Yes its Black)
BlackHat is offline  
Old 06-16-2014, 07:54 PM   #13
hcobb
 
hcobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pacheco, California
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackHat View Post
I thought they were trying to say they don't stack. Thus 3 1/1 infantry riding 3 LT tanks in the same square do NOT become 3/1 infantry for ATT or DEF. (Unless they dismount then they can become 3/1)
From the published rulebook I got the mental image of three Lt Tanks (French of course) carrying three separate squads of squads of infantry through the Ardennes Forest come under attack from a NAC GEV. The French tankers note the incoming rounds and the infantry vanish, to be found next turn huddled together as a platoon under the trees.
__________________
-HJC
hcobb is online now  
Old 06-16-2014, 10:15 PM   #14
GranitePenguin
 
GranitePenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Plainfield, IL
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Page 5, Section 6, 8.06.1
What happens to infantry which is still mounted on a unit, when they unit is rammed?

"they" should be "the"

What happens to infantry which is still mounted on a unit, when the unit is rammed?
__________________
GranitePenguin
MIB #2214
GranitePenguin is online now  
Old 06-16-2014, 10:35 PM   #15
KevinR
 
KevinR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chicago, IL
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hcobb View Post
From the published rulebook I got the mental image of three Lt Tanks (French of course) carrying three separate squads of squads of infantry through the Ardennes Forest come under attack from a NAC GEV. The French tankers note the incoming rounds and the infantry vanish, to be found next turn huddled together as a platoon under the trees.
That scenario seems consistent with the rules -- as soon as they dismount (and hide under the trees) the infantry can re-form into a full-strength platoon.

The issue in the errata/FAQ instead seems to be what happens while the infantry is still hanging on to the tanks. In that case, I think that each vehicle of infantry should be considered a separate squad:
* 1 INF riding a LT has a defense of 1 for combat purposes.
* 2 INF riding a SHVY has a defense of 2 for combat purposes (see the example in 5.11.2).
* 3 INF riding 3 LT each have a defense of 1 for combat purposes.

This does raise another issue for 5.11.1 -- what happens if a scenario permits INF to ride a Mark III (or larger) Ogre? That Ogre can carry 4-6 squads, which presumably need to group in 3s per 7.12.1.
KevinR is offline  
Old 06-17-2014, 08:17 AM   #16
Talorien
Former Ogre Line Editor
 
Talorien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinR View Post
That scenario seems consistent with the rules -- as soon as they dismount (and hide under the trees) the infantry can re-form into a full-strength platoon.

The issue in the errata/FAQ instead seems to be what happens while the infantry is still hanging on to the tanks. In that case, I think that each vehicle of infantry should be considered a separate squad:
* 1 INF riding a LT has a defense of 1 for combat purposes.
* 2 INF riding a SHVY has a defense of 2 for combat purposes (see the example in 5.11.2).
* 3 INF riding 3 LT each have a defense of 1 for combat purposes.

This does raise another issue for 5.11.1 -- what happens if a scenario permits INF to ride a Mark III (or larger) Ogre? That Ogre can carry 4-6 squads, which presumably need to group in 3s per 7.12.1.
Current wording (updated in my unposted 1.01 errata document):

7.12.1 Attacks on stacked infantry units (p. 16) Add “Infantry mounted on the same vehicle always form a single group. Other infantry in the hex may not be joined to this group."

Yes, the intention of the errata is that:
  • all squads on Vehicle #1 are one group
  • all squads on Vehicle #2 are a second group
  • etc
As Kevin says, vehicles which can carry >3 squads break this rule, but I think that's better handled at the FAQ rather than the rule level (there's currently no unit which can do so, except the hypothetical consenting Ogres)
Talorien is offline  
Old 06-17-2014, 08:20 AM   #17
Talorien
Former Ogre Line Editor
 
Talorien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GranitePenguin View Post
Page 5, Section 6, 8.06.1
What happens to infantry which is still mounted on a unit, when they unit is rammed?

"they" should be "the"

What happens to infantry which is still mounted on a unit, when the unit is rammed?
Thanks. I've done some editing cleanup for typos like this in my unposted update, but do send feedback if you spot more - I might have missed something.
Talorien is offline  
Old 06-17-2014, 08:59 AM   #18
Talorien
Former Ogre Line Editor
 
Talorien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Another update:

11.04.3 Ramming buildings (p. 22) Should say “A Heavy Tank or Superheavy may ram once per turn. A Heavy Tank undergoes a 2-1 attack when it rams. A Superheavy undergoes a 1-1 attack, and also loses treads as an Ogre Mark I if optional rule 13.07 is in use. GEVs and GEV-PCs can only damage . . . ”

Compare these four cases in the current rules:

1. Heavy Tank

Does 1d6 damage to building
Suffers 1-2 attack (1-in-6 chance of D, 1-in-6 chance of X)
Damage is equivalent of a 1.5 Attack Strength attack on the Heavy

2. Superheavy Tank

Does 2d6 damage to building
Suffers 1-2 attack (1-in-6 chance of D, 1-in-6 chance of X)
Damage is equivalent of a 2.5 Attack Strength attack on the SHVY

3. Superheavy Tank using 13.07

Does 2d6 damage to building
Loses 5 treads
Damage is equivalent of three 5 Attack Strength attacks on the SHVY

4. Ogre Mark I

Does 2d6 damage to building
Loses 5 treads
Damage is equivalent of three 5 Attack Strength attacks on the Ogre

----
The Heavy/Superheavy in #1 and #2 get off very lightly compared to #3 and #4.

While a case can be made that the Heavy doesn't ram as hard and so does less damage to itself, the firepower-suffered-to-damage-done ratio is significantly less than in cases #3 and #4.

The most anomalous case is #3 - it somehow manages to take too much damage (compared to case #2) and too little damage (compared to case #4, considering that SHVYs normally suffer a 1-1 when they try to be like a Mark I, 6.07.1) at the same time.
Talorien is offline  
Old 06-19-2014, 10:14 PM   #19
dwalend
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talorien View Post
As Kevin says, vehicles which can carry >3 squads break this rule, but I think that's better handled at the FAQ rather than the rule level (there's currently no unit which can do so, except the hypothetical consenting Ogres)
I think it'd be better as a rule, especially as I'm hoping for a Pacific supplement and their Ogres sometimes give infantry a lift. I see two options for it when you decide to take it on.

Either the extra infantry squads are very vulnerable (maybe packed on a big landing craft), their maximum defense is 3, and a D result wipes out all but two Inf.

Or the infantry gain some cover from the vehicle (Ogres are big and have lots of nooks and crannies to duck into), so multiple Inf groups fit. Ogre Inf capacity is size -3, and the largest size is 9, so the largest ogre can cary 6 squads. "Any ogre bigger than a MkI (size 6 or larger) can carry two groups." Both groups take spill-over so they are still pretty vulnerable.
dwalend is online now  
Old 06-19-2014, 10:25 PM   #20
dwalend
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Default Re: Ogre Designer's Edition Official Errata and FAQ (Draft of 14 June)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talorien View Post
Another update:

11.04.3 Ramming buildings (p. 22) Should say “A Heavy Tank or Superheavy may ram once per turn. A Heavy Tank undergoes a 2-1 attack when it rams. A Superheavy undergoes a 1-1 attack, and also loses treads as an Ogre Mark I if optional rule 13.07 is in use. GEVs and GEV-PCs can only damage . . . ”
...
The Heavy/Superheavy in #1 and #2 get off very lightly compared to #3 and #4.

While a case can be made that the Heavy doesn't ram as hard and so does less damage to itself, the firepower-suffered-to-damage-done ratio is significantly less than in cases #3 and #4.
I noticed that, too. We have (had?) a house rule that the Ogres took a strength-3 attack on the treads that worked OK. Ogres weren't shy about ramming buildings. It drew the ogre into a fixed position where it'd grind away on a building while attracting a lot of attention. It was fun.
dwalend is online now  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.